NEW YORK — Rudy Giuliani was deemed in contempt of court on Monday due to his inadequate response to requests for information while attempting to fulfill a $148 million defamation judgment awarded to two election workers from Georgia.
Judge Lewis J. Liman made the ruling after Giuliani testified for the second consecutive day in a contempt hearing, as the election workers’ legal representatives argued that Giuliani had not complied with requests for evidence over the past months.
The judge stated that Giuliani “willfully violated a clear and unambiguous order of this court” when he ignored a December 20 deadline to provide the necessary evidence. This evidence is intended to assist the judge in determining if Giuliani can retain his Palm Beach, Florida, condominium as a primary residence or if it must be surrendered as it is classified as a vacation home.
According to Liman, Giuliani’s failure to provide the names of his doctors or a complete list of his professional service providers led the judge to likely conclude at the upcoming trial that these individuals were not located in Florida or had not changed after January 1, 2024, the date on which Giuliani claimed to have established his Palm Beach residence.
The judge also ruled that Giuliani could not present testimony regarding emails or text messages to demonstrate that his homestead was in Florida. Liman criticized Giuliani for only producing a limited set of “cherry-picked” documents, without any phone records, emails, or texts pertinent to his claim.
Liman indicated that he might draw inferences during the trial about the “gaps” in the evidence stemming from Giuliani’s incomplete submission.
While Liman withheld judgment on other potential sanctions, Giuliani had appeared in court on Friday for approximately three hours and was granted permission to continue his testimony remotely for over two hours from his Palm Beach condominium.
After the ruling, Giuliani’s attorney, Joseph Cammarata, remarked in an email that the absence of the election workers in court was not unexpected, labeling the situation as “lawfare” characterized by the legal system being weaponized against Giuliani.
Cammarata likened Giuliani’s case to the criminal case against former President Donald Trump, alleging that left-leaning Democrats were attempting to manipulate the judicial system in New York to achieve outcomes they could not win through legitimate merits.
During the hearing, Giuliani’s backdrop featured an American flag, which he stated he typically used for an online program, but the judge ordered him to switch to a neutral background. At one point, Giuliani displayed his grandfather’s pocket watch, indicating his willingness to let it go.
Giuliani admitted that he sometimes did not provide requested information because he viewed the demands as overly broad or inappropriate, suggesting that they might be “traps” set by the plaintiffs’ lawyers.
He claimed that complying with these requests was complicated by numerous ongoing legal issues, but the judge dismissed one of his assertions as “preposterous,” emphasizing that suspicion of the plaintiffs’ intentions did not justify disregarding court orders.
The 80-year-old former mayor expressed that the demands made it “impossible to function in an official way” around 30% to 40% of the time.
After the judge’s ruling, Giuliani released a statement through his publicist, expressing regret over the current state of the justice system, which he believes has devolved into a “total mockery” with theatrical hearings instead of genuine trials.
Lawyers for the election workers alleged that Giuliani has consistently defied Liman’s order from October to liquidate assets, which followed his liability findings in 2023 for defaming their clients by incorrectly accusing them of ballot tampering during the 2020 presidential election.
In court documents, they indicated that while Giuliani has surrendered a Mercedes-Benz and his New York apartment, he has not provided the necessary documentation to monetize these assets. They claimed he had also failed to hand over various watches, sports memorabilia, including a Joe DiMaggio jersey, and has not submitted “a single dollar from his nonexempt cash accounts.”
Giuliani stated on Monday that he was investigating the whereabouts of the DiMaggio jersey and that he currently did not know its location.
Aaron Nathan, an attorney representing the election workers, declined to comment following the ruling.
The trial, which will determine whether Giuliani must relinquish his Florida condominium and World Series rings, is scheduled for January 16. His legal team remains optimistic that they can ultimately regain possession of his personal items through an appeal.
